01
Identity and sessions
Registration, login, recovery, MFA, session lifecycle, token handling and account enumeration.
web application pentestingWeb application pentesting,
Web application pentesting,
built around real user and attacker paths.
Test authentication, authorization, sessions, inputs and business workflows before an attacker or customer assurance review does.
what this engagement answers
A web application penetration test asks what an attacker can actually achieve through your application, not how many scanner signatures match. The work follows data and privilege across user roles, APIs, administrative functions and integrations.
The strongest engagements begin with test accounts for distinct roles and an agreed view of critical actions. That makes it possible to test horizontal and vertical authorization, workflow bypasses and chained weaknesses safely.
Primary baselines: OWASP Web Security Testing Guide and NIST SP 800-115.
scope
What is reviewed.
Final scope is confirmed in writing before work starts. Testing is performed only on authorised assets and within agreed rules of engagement.
02
Authorization
Cross-account access, role escalation, object ownership, administrative functions and tenant separation.
03
Inputs and execution
Injection, unsafe deserialization, file handling, server-side requests and client-side attack paths.
04
Business logic
Price, quantity, approval, invitation, entitlement and state-transition abuse that scanners cannot reason about.
05
Browser security
Cross-site scripting, request forgery, clickjacking, CORS, caching and browser storage decisions.
06
Configuration and exposure
Headers, diagnostics, forgotten endpoints, error handling, secrets, dependencies and deployment mistakes.
evidence
What you receive.
01
Executive decision summaryExposure, plausible impact and the order in which leadership should fund remediation.
02
Reproducible technical findingsAffected component, evidence, preconditions, impact and safe reproduction guidance.
03
Remediation planSpecific fixes grouped by urgency, owner and dependency rather than a flat vulnerability list.
04
Closure evidenceA retest outcome that distinguishes fixed, partially fixed, accepted and still-open findings.
// how it works
A controlled, decision-ready process
The engagement turns technical observations into owned decisions. Critical issues are escalated through the agreed channel, not left waiting for the final report.
01
Authorise
Confirm assets, accounts, timing, exclusions, contacts and stop conditions.
02
Model
Map roles, trust boundaries, sensitive actions and likely attacker paths.
03
Test
Combine manual investigation with appropriate tooling and safe proof.
04
Prioritise
Rate findings using exploitability, exposure, data impact and business context.
05
Retest
Verify fixes and record the final status for stakeholders and assurance teams.
buyer questions
What teams usually ask.
Is this only an automated scan?
No. Tooling supports coverage, but a tester validates findings, explores authorization and business logic, and removes false positives.
Can production be tested?
Yes, when risk, rate limits, exclusions, data handling and stop conditions are explicitly agreed. A suitable staging environment may be safer for destructive cases.
What access is needed?
Usually the application URL, representative accounts for each role, API or architecture context where available, and a responsive technical contact.
Methodology and primary references
These sources define the baseline. The exact checks are selected for the architecture, risk, data flows and engagement objective, not copied as a generic checklist.
- OWASP Web Security Testing Guide: community testing framework for web applications
- NIST SP 800-115: technical guide to information security testing and assessment
Need evidence that the application resists real misuse?
Send the application type, user roles and preferred testing window. Do not send passwords or sensitive data through the form.